Title:Dirt the movie Director: Bill Benenson and Gene Rosow Release year:2009 What is the central argument or narrative of the film? The central argument of the film is the title of the film (dirt). The film shows the importance of the soil in our life, how are we destroying the quality of it, how we could improve the quality and the impacts could it bring when the dirt is not healthy. The film stated many reasons for the soil pollution. Demand of natural recourses destroys soil. Mountains are cut off for coal mining. All the metals are free to get into the water. Because of urban density, more concrete will cover up the dirt. It will produce heat Island effect from the black pavement. Treated soil badly could turn a land to a desert. Monoculture is destroying the soil. The monoculture will face drought because of killing the dirt. The pesticides take way the organism that helps the soil. Nitrogen fertilizers rob the nutrients. Trees protect the soil and helps air quality. Deforestation is one of the results of mono-agriculture. People are cutting down trees for clear land to grow food. When it rains the soil easily washed way. What sustainability problems does the film draw out? The film mentioned several sustainability problems. They are climate change, drought, flood, water pollution, war, and death. Hungry people are rioting for food. City congestion is also resulting by farming practice. Since farmers cannot make profit, many of them are migrating to cities and living in the slum. Farmers are committing suicide because of the debt. They could not afford the pesticides. Many farmers committed suicide in India. Different pesticides used in farming, the not only harm the soil but also harm the water. The pesticides take way the structure of the water What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? Before watching the film, I did not consider soil pollution could be a big sustainable problem. I did not know that, the mobile nitrogen is taken 20% by the plants; rest goes into the river, which kills fish and helps to produce more jellyfish. I also did not know about perennial root, which helps to hold the soil and Stop soil erosion. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? The film was very good with stating problems, giving reasons and suggesting solutions, because of timing it probably it did not broadly discuss the on the reason of the soil pollutions and there solutions. Like it talked about the coal mining, but did not mentioned about other bad affects of coal mining, besides deforestation. It also did not suggest, how could we stop the this. What audiences does the film best address? Why? I think everybody could watch this film. The cartoon characters made the film very interesting and could get a lot of attention from the kids. This film did not use many statistics and data, which makes the film less boring and easily understood to the people without specific knowledge. Besides normal people, this film could also be good for the people who are part of a government and a corporate. This film could inspire them to change laws and take actions to stop soil pollution. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? The film did not include many suggestions for the farming in USA. It mentioned about using different seed for farming, but did not mentioned about what kind of seed will grow in the weather like USA. The film did not mention about the problem about landscaping. Aesthetically beautiful landscape could be harmful for the soil, instead of helping it. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective. This film was great about giving suggestion. The film suggests to grow a relationship with the dirt instead of thinking it as a dirty object. Instead of ignoring the soil, we should give it an importance. Plaster made out of clay and cow dung is better than the plaster is made out of cement. It keeps the house cooler in summer and warmer in winter. We should use variety of seeds to enrich the soil. One group moved to village to produce foods organically. CSA community supported agriculture helps (yearly subscription fee) the farmers to produce food. We should make more park, make green roof, take of the excessive concrete. The garbage and fish waste could be compost with the soil to enrich it. Harness energy from the soil from microbial fuel cells and use them in parks, and landscape. Working in the garden helps prisoners to go back to the society. They could pay the city back. Kids are less aggressive after working with soil. Gang kids help to take to the graffiti. Green team program helped many people. Therefore, government should also support these programs. What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? I wanted to know more about microbial fuel cells. A microbial fuel cell is a device that converts chemical energy to electrical energy by the catalytic reaction of microorganisms. A typical microbial fuel cell consists of anode and cathode compartments separated by a cation specific membrane. In the anode compartment, fuel is oxidized by microorganisms, generating electrons and protons. Electrons are transferred to the cathode compartment through an external electric circuit, and the protons are transferred to the cathode compartment through the membrane. Microbial fuel cells are very potential for generating electricity. Some fuel cells could use bacteria to transfer electrons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microbial_fuel_cell
Director: Bill Benenson and Gene Rosow
Release year: 2009
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central argument of the film is the title of the film (dirt). The film shows the importance of the soil in our life, how are we destroying the quality of it, how we could improve the quality and the impacts could it bring when the dirt is not healthy. The film stated many reasons for the soil pollution. Demand of natural recourses destroys soil. Mountains are cut off for coal mining. All the metals are free to get into the water. Because of urban density, more concrete will cover up the dirt. It will produce heat Island effect from the black pavement. Treated soil badly could turn a land to a desert. Monoculture is destroying the soil. The monoculture will face drought because of killing the dirt. The pesticides take way the organism that helps the soil. Nitrogen fertilizers rob the nutrients. Trees protect the soil and helps air quality. Deforestation is one of the results of mono-agriculture. People are cutting down trees for clear land to grow food. When it rains the soil easily washed way.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
The film mentioned several sustainability problems. They are climate change, drought, flood, water pollution, war, and death. Hungry people are rioting for food. City congestion is also resulting by farming practice. Since farmers cannot make profit, many of them are migrating to cities and living in the slum. Farmers are committing suicide because of the debt. They could not afford the pesticides. Many farmers committed suicide in India. Different pesticides used in farming, the not only harm the soil but also harm the water. The pesticides take way the structure of the water
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
Before watching the film, I did not consider soil pollution could be a big sustainable problem. I did not know that, the mobile nitrogen is taken 20% by the plants; rest goes into the river, which kills fish and helps to produce more jellyfish. I also did not know about perennial root, which helps to hold the soil and Stop soil erosion.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
The film was very good with stating problems, giving reasons and suggesting solutions, because of timing it probably it did not broadly discuss the on the reason of the soil pollutions and there solutions. Like it talked about the coal mining, but did not mentioned about other bad affects of coal mining, besides deforestation. It also did not suggest, how could we stop the this.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
I think everybody could watch this film. The cartoon characters made the film very interesting and could get a lot of attention from the kids. This film did not use many statistics and data, which makes the film less boring and easily understood to the people without specific knowledge. Besides normal people, this film could also be good for the people who are part of a government and a corporate. This film could inspire them to change laws and take actions to stop soil pollution.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The film did not include many suggestions for the farming in USA. It mentioned about using different seed for farming, but did not mentioned about what kind of seed will grow in the weather like USA. The film did not mention about the problem about landscaping. Aesthetically beautiful landscape could be harmful for the soil, instead of helping it.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
This film was great about giving suggestion. The film suggests to grow a relationship with the dirt instead of thinking it as a dirty object. Instead of ignoring the soil, we should give it an importance. Plaster made out of clay and cow dung is better than the plaster is made out of cement. It keeps the house cooler in summer and warmer in winter. We should use variety of seeds to enrich the soil. One group moved to village to produce foods organically. CSA community supported agriculture helps (yearly subscription fee) the farmers to produce food. We should make more park, make green roof, take of the excessive concrete. The garbage and fish waste could be compost with the soil to enrich it. Harness energy from the soil from microbial fuel cells and use them in parks, and landscape. Working in the garden helps prisoners to go back to the society. They could pay the city back. Kids are less aggressive after working with soil. Gang kids help to take to the graffiti. Green team program helped many people. Therefore, government should also support these programs.
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
I wanted to know more about microbial fuel cells. A microbial fuel cell is a device that converts chemical energy to electrical energy by the catalytic reaction of microorganisms. A typical microbial fuel cell consists of anode and cathode compartments separated by a cation specific membrane. In the anode compartment, fuel is oxidized by microorganisms, generating electrons and protons. Electrons are transferred to the cathode compartment through an external electric circuit, and the protons are transferred to the cathode compartment through the membrane. Microbial fuel cells are very potential for generating electricity. Some fuel cells could use bacteria to transfer electrons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microbial_fuel_cell